KEEPING THE MONKEYS AWAY FROM THE TYPEWRITERS:
AN ANTHROPOLOGIST'S VIEW OF THE CONSUMER BEHAVIOR ODYSSEY
John F. Sherry, Jr., Northwestern University
Abstract
no matter which intellectual tradition is averred as the
researcher's home turf. Holbrook's (1987) eloquent plea
for the sheltering and nurturing of "new" approaches in
consumer research may help buy us enough time to make
this discrimination possible.
In this essay, the Consumer Behavior Odyssey is subjected
to a premature personal evaluation. The project is viewed
in both its scientific and mythopoeic aspects, as a
significant pilot with potentially profound long term
consequences.
Picaresque Paradigmatic Pluralism
Introduction
A number of concerns have driven my participation in the
Odyssey, and have shaped my perception of its significance. First in importance is my fascination with metaphor.
Several
authors
in particular
(Arndt 1985;
Fernandez 1974; Gusfield 1981; McCloskey 1985; Turbayne
1962; Turner 1974; White 1978) have influenced much of my
recent thinking on the ideological consequences of metaphoric discourse. No way of knowing is exempt from the
influence of metaphor, and this notion needs to be injected quite forcefully into the mainstream of consumer
research. Several distinct metaphors and their variants
appear to be contesting for a hearing within the field.
Turbayne (1962) wisely ' suggests that three options are
available to supplanters of paradigms. You can lose
awareness of your nietaphor and mistake it for literal
truth; you can treat your metaphor as an allegory yourself, but offer it' for literal consvimption to other
people and other times; you can realize there are no
proper sorts into which facts dust be allocated, but only
better metaphors. It is this third option that seems most
viable, and which reminds us to be aware that our adoption of a metaphor alters our attitude toward facts.
research project. The project itself was intended to
build upon Tucker's (1967) long neglected call for truly
innovative research into the foundations of consumer
behavior. The essay is more impressionistic than analytical, insofar as little analysis of primary field materials has yet been conducted. Rather, I will seek to
interpret the significance of the project from an anthropological perspective that is highly personal.
The Odyssey has its origins in the dissatisfaction of a
handful of researchers with the excessive reliance of
their colleagues upon a logical positivist paradigm to
interpret consumer behavior. It has been said that if a
roomful of monkeys were seated at typewriters and allowed
to bang randomly upon the keyboards, they would eventually produce the entire works of Shakespeare. Norbert
Weiner (1964), the father of modern cybernetics, once
observed that one of the needs of science is to keep the
monkeys away from the typewriters. This marvelously
ambiguous directive is the theme I intend to explore in
this essay. I will attempt this exploration with the same
ragamuffin, barefoot irreverence Bronowski (1973) expected of serious students, and with the same fine disregard
for rules that William Webb Ellis displayed in originating the distinctive feature of the rugby game. Both of
these principles are exemplified in my Odyssey fieldmates, and together provide an appropriate inscape for
the task at hand.
A second motive for embracing Belk's picaresque proposal
is my sense that some sea change in consumer research is
in progress. This change is less an incipient paradigm
shift than a mild irritant at this time, but this heretical spirit has already infused enough of a critical
mass of researchers that some hope exists for accretion
of new knowledge. Whether we tilt at windmills like
Quixote or carry our oar inland to be identified as a
winnowing fan as Odysseus once did remains to be seen.
In many ways, the spirit of Jack Kerouac presided over
the Odyssey. Temple's (1986) interview with William
Burroughs captures something of this presence. "Jack
Kerouac was a writer," says Burroughs. "Many people who
call themselves writers and who have their names on books
are not writers - the difference being, a bullfighter who
fights a bull is different from a bullshitter who makes
passes with no bull there. The writer has been there or
he can't write about it. And going there he risks being
gored." Similarly, the Odyssey fieldworkers have been
there. and have come here today to risk being gored. As a
member of the research team, I will attempt something of
a pre-emptive goring.
A third incentive for joining the Odyssey stems from my
dismay over weird science and killer paradigms. In our
pursuit of normal science, most of us protect the investment we have in our training (and in our sense of self)
by advancing our research orientations as more tban one
mere way of knowing. We also search for (or assume we
have) a model capable of explaining consumption in all
its complexity, rather than entertain seriously the
notion of some scholars (Barrett 1984; Levine 1985) that
since ambiguity and uncertainty may be the norm of social
life, our models must incorporate ambiguity. To politicize their efforts to complement or supplant accepted
approaches to consumer behavior, some researchers have
taken to promoting alternative approaches as "weirdscience." This politicized stance is a mispositioning of
the critical issue of pluralism, and may alienate as many
potential recruits to the cause as it attracts naive
converts; the concept implies an anarchic or irrelevant
iconoclasm, and wears a tainted halo. The pluralism
enshrined by Hirschman (1985) may as easily be entombed
by Hirschman (1986) if this metaphor is popularly adopted. As a compromise between weird science and killer
paradigms I suggest we consider Malinowski's "coefficient
of weirdness" - the power of words to unite the user with
the beings to whom he or she Wishes to connect - to apply
to all of our research efforts.
A number of monkey-and-typewriter disputes currently
animates consumer research. Among the paradigms contesting for interpretive primacy are those labelled logical
empiricist, sociopolitical, subjective world, and liberating (Arndt 1985; Morgan 1980). Analytic scientists,
conceptual theorists, particular humanists and conceptual
humanists are among the types of researcher currently
investigating consumer behavior (Hirscbman 1985; Mitroff
and Kilmann 1978). Shweder (1986) has recently taken us
on an amusing tour of the emic hierarchies of science
that has social scientists deferring to physical scientists, who in turn defer to physicists, who in their turn
defer' to mathematicians who claim their work is ultimately quite mystical and intuitive. Each of these disputes distract us from the critical intramural issue in
consumer research. At issue is our ability to discriminate between genuine, or competent research on the one
hand, and spurious, or incompetent research on the other.
A final concern prompting my participation in the Odyssey
Is the growing interest I detect among practitioners in
ethnography. Several recent trade press articles have
praised the merits of ethnographic research as practiced
370
instrument in the bargain.
by ad agencies and marketing consultants, but reveal
little understanding of that approach. In fact a range ofi
"ethnographic" approaches,, linked by little more thar|
labels, has prompted me to think in terms of the good,j
the bad, and the ugly in qualitative research. We have^
traditional ethnography, the long term labor intensive!
field immersion favored by academic researchers. We hav^
"adnography,'* a kind of rip-and-run hot-button solutior
to the need of managers for intimate yet efficient contact with contextually embedded consumers. Finally, we
have "blitzkrieg ethnography," which combines some of tbe
best and worst features of the other variants. Blitzkrieg
ethnography provides just enough field exposure to tantalize and to aid hypothesizing, but not enough for comprehensive understanding. By joining the Odyssey, I gave up
my fear of becoming a member of a qualitative swat team
in favor of experiencing the tension betweien blitzkrieg
ethnography and what Whyte (1978) has called diagnostid
research.
Methodologically, the Odyssey exhibited several distinct
strengths. The use of participant obsei-vation and emergent design to study consumer phenomena, and the express
avoidance of survey or laboratory methods of any type,
are significant in their own right. The meticulous recording of data through journals, fieldnotes, audio- and
videotapes, photographs and artifactual collection, all
with an eye toward auditing by scholars not affiliated
with the project, and toward eventual deposit in a public
archive, should serve as a benchmark for subsequent
naturalistic inquiry into consumer beha.vior. The use of
an interdisciplinary team approach to inquiry, rare
enough in consumer research of any kind, is an especially
significant contribution. Logistical headaches and intellectual property rights disputes notwithstanding, the
melding of disciplinary (and school) perspectives and the
level of adversarial discourse in the service of consumer
research themselves were a wonder to behold. The daily
Odyssey audit - and its peripatetic cousin, the periodic
Odyssey audit - that helped shaped the emergent design, of
the project and kept inquirers close tO' the corpus was
another methodological plus. Finally, the techniques of
auditing, autodriving and member checking helped provide
an integrity to the project that is often lacking in
other qualitative studies.
Comforting myself with the Odyssey's emergent design, its
interesting balance of individu,al initiative with the
buddy system, and its fascinating mix of principal investigators, I drew up a list of researchable issues. On my
list were small group culture, secondary markets, ethnicity, tourism and market pitching. My negotiated participation was to be a comfortable one. Base field sites at
which ongoing research was unfolding, coupled witb more
extemporaneous,
free-form
investigations
in
transit
between f^ixed sites I found to be a workable compromise.
That the project would become a travellin,g seminar, or
on-going workshop of sorts, at which professional researchers would both teach and learn, was; perhaps its
most appealing feature.
A number of substantive shortcomings are evident in the
project as well. Principal among these was the phenomenon
I have taken to calling "mesomorphic" description. Many
of the observations and insights notched by the project
fall along the clinal zone between the "thick description" (Geertz 1973) to which the inquirers aspired and
the "thin, description" to which we have become accustomed
in consumer research. Short term field immersion and
pressure to produce a tangible project conspired in many
cases to produce description that, while contextually
rich, lacked much of the fullness that might have been
captured. An outgroup focus also produced a serious flaw
in the research. For a number of reasons, no systematic
ethnography of the small group research culture was
attempted, leaving only journal entries and post hoc
anecdotal material (including some marvelous war stories)
from which some retrospective account might be constructed. Finally, division of labor among Odyssey researchers
was suboptimal throughout the project. The merits of
redundancy are considerable, if pursued strategically.
However, a large and continually changing crew, along
with some belief in the possibility of consensus, militated against efficient use of each member's talents.
Scientific Aspect: Naturalistic Inquiry
In the absence of an analyzed corpus of field data, I
will discuss briefly what I tbink to be some of tbe major
strengths and limitations of the Consumer Behavior
Odyssey. The reader is advised that these remarks are
tentative and exploratory; certainly some of them may be
revised as the field data is analyzed and shared.
Substantively, the project has several major strengths
Given the political field within which interdisciplinar;
research into consijimer behavior is conducted, perhaps th
most significant aspect of the project was that it wa
funded, and funded well. Funding would seem to be a clea
signal of the promise of a project, especially one a
exploratory as the Odyssey. Multiple funding sources
advertising agencies. Marketing Science Institute, nijime
rous universities - and multiple types of backing
grants, equipment, lodging, personnel - are furthe
indicators of the appeal of a novel approach. The use o
niimerous venues as research sites allowed for a kin
horizon expansion and comparative investigation atypica
of consumer research in general; multiple venues made i
possible to honor the spirit of Tucker's (1967) call fo
foundation work. An infrastructure of contacts, infor
mants and colleagues established during the project wil
become the basis for longer term follow-up investigation;
of selected phenomena. Studies begun on the summer pilo
will be continued and extended by project personnel ithe coming year. The creation of a research culture and
consumer franchise to speed acceptance of naturalisti
inquiry into consumer research is among the most signifi
cant of the Odyssey's accomplishments. A larger critica
mass of naturalistic inquirers and an audience nior
receptive to postpositivist methodology have each bee
generated through the project. The establishment of a
archive to house and circulate data collected during th
Odyssey is another major contribution of the project
Once suitably altered (via pseudonyms, etc.), Odyssedata will be made available to researchers outside o
prpject personnel. A final substantive strength of th
project was the opportunity it afforded pa.rticipants fo
personal growth. Shweder (1986) has observed that goo
ethnography in an intellectual exorcism in which we ar
wrtenched out of our self. Each of the participants share
such an experience, and increased his or her acuity as a
Methodological shortcomings are also apparent. The tension between blitzkrieg ethnography and diagnostic research to which I earlier referred was a source of concern. As if he or she were some curious hybrid of
Levitt's (1983) derivative fox and hedgehog, the researcher often felt at turns quite knowledgeable and
quite ignorant; myopic at one time, hyperopic at another.
Feelings of being spread too thin, or of being the proverbial "kid in a candy store" accompanied this tension.
As the summer progressed, the group became more proficient at observing and interpreting common phenomena
across sites, but the exploration of solitary and ephemeral phenomena proved more problematic. Flawed enculturation rituals also marred some of the cohesiveness the
group might have been expected to attain over time. More
attention to building organic solidarity within the group
would have produced a collective instrument of greater
acuity. Finally, the curious high tech/low tech learning
transitions that each inquirer experienced in acquiring
new research skills served to impair competence and
performance over time.
To render a judgment that may be clearly premature, I
viewed the Odyssey from a scientific perspective as an
important pilot study with significant long term potential. Whatever substantive research reports are generated
may be expected ultimately to be dwarfed by the secondary
gains or ripple effects the project will produce. As a
benchmark study, the Odyssey succeeded in getting a
371
naturalistic foot into the door of legitimate consumer
research concerns. It seems to have been an enterprise
toward which few researchers were indifferent. A quick
head-count of sympathisizers and detractors suggests that
the project succeeded in capturing the imagination of the
field at large. In the following section, I will attempt
to interpret the significance of that imagination.
and can be interpreted as a metasocial commentary. A
pilgrim is an initiand entering into a deeper level of
existence than he or she has known in a customary setting; the pilgrim confronts, in a special, "far" milieu,
the basic elements of his or her faith (Turner 1978).
Perhaps the most potent qualifier of the Odyssey as
pilgrimage can be quoted directly from Turner: " ... in
the present age of plural values, increasing specialization of function and role, and potent mass communication
... pilgrimage ... serves ... to recollect, and to presage, an alternative mode of social being ... Thus out of
the mixing and mingling of ideas from many traditions, a
respect may grow for the pilgrimages of others (1978);"
Belk's Odysseans sought Tucker's foundations as one way
of advancing consumer research.
Mythopoeic Aspect; The Heroic View
If we allow full play to the metaphor that undergirds the
Consumer Behavior Odyssey, it is not presumptuous to
suggest that the ultimate significance of the project is
its mythopoeic value. Belk has advanced what might be
glossed as a heroic view of consumer research, and I will
explore briefly some of the mythic aspects that contribute to that vision.
Conclusion
Heroism in classical perspective is enshrined in two
prominent vehicles. The first is the epic. Epic heroes
traditionally exhibit qualities of fortitudo and sapientia. Fortitudo is strength that ranges from the merely
physical to the nearly mystical. Sapientia is wisdom that
ranges from street smarts to true enlightenment. Both are
qualities that enable the hero to prosper in an imperfect
world. The route to self-fulfillment has varied narrowly
through time. The heroes of Homer and Virgil (Achilleus,
Odysseus, Aeneas) travelled the sea. Those of Spenser,
Cervantes and Fielding (Arthur, Red Cross Knight, Don
Quixote, Joseph Andrews) travelled
the open road.
Mailer's heroes (Aldrin, Armstrong) travel space, while
those of Kazantzakis and Milton (Odysseus and Satan)
travel, and become, the cosmos. Latter day heroic travellers such as Kerouac, Kesey and Kurault provide a contemporary genealogical link between the classic heroes and
Belk's Odysseans. The heroic view of consumer research
casts alternative paradigms as the principal actor.
On my way out the door to join the Odyssey launch, Sid
Levy advised me to beware of sirens. As always, his
advice is sound. Whether naturalistic inquiry is in fact
the winnowing fan that Odysseus' oar must become remains
to be seen. I am satisfied that I spent my suinmer vacation merging the ludic with the ergic. I can think of few
more effective strategies for monkeying with typewriters.
Refersnces
Arndt, Johan (1985), "On Making Marketing More Scientific: Role of Orientations, Paradigms, Metaphors, and
Puzzle Solving," Journal of Marketing. 49(3): 11-23.
Bronowski, Jacob (1973),
Little Brown & Company.
The
"Ascent
of Man.
Boston:
Barrett, Stanley (1984), The Rebirth of Anthropological
Theorv. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
The second heroic vehicle
is ritual. I will use
Campbell's (1949) monomyth as the archetypal heroic
ritual. Campbell views the nuclear unit of the monomyth
as a cyclical process of kathodos (a down-going), katharsis, and anodos (an up - coming) . The hero ventures forth
from the everyday world into a region of supernatural
wonder. In his encounter with "fabulous forces," the hero
wins a decisive victory and returns from his adventure
with the power to bestow boons on others. Once again,
Belk's Odysseans propose that the naturalistic paradigm,
having been tested in radical encounters with the other,
be adopted by researchers.
Campbell, Joseph (1949), The Hero With a Thousand Faces.
Princeton: Princeton University' Press.
Another mythic interpretation of the Consumer Behavior
Odyssey frames the project as a rite de passage. In Van
Gennep's (1960) scheme, rites de passage have a tripartite structure: separation (detachment from a stable,
fixed sociocultural state), margin (a terminal phase
characterized by ambiguity and communitas, during which
an individual is betwixt and between familiar classification) , and aggregation (return to classified, secular
social life). This progression from structure through
antistructure back to structure (Turner 1969) is precisely the pattern followed by the Odyssey project, at
both the literal, physical level and at the abstract,
paradigmatic level. Just as the Odysseans dropped out of
their traditional social roles and created a community of
the road before returning, so also did they renounce
traditional disciplinary affiliations and models to
embrace alternatives, before returning to the fold.
Hirschman, Elizabeth (1985), "Scientific Style and the
Conduct of Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research. 12: 142-154.
Fernandez, James (1984), "The Mission of Metaphor in
Expressive Culture," Current Anthropologv. 15(2): 119145.
Geertz, Clifford (1973), The Interpretation of Cultures.
New York: Basic Books.
Cusfield, Joseph (1981), Drinking-Driving and the Symbolic Order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(1986), "Humanistic, Inquiry in Marketing Research: Philosophy, Method, and Criteria," Journal of
Marketing Research. 23(August): 237-249.
Holbrook, Morris (1987), "The Study of Signs in Consumer
Esthetics: An Egocentric Review," in Marketing and Semiotics: New Directions in the Studv of Signs for Sale, eds.
Jean Umiker-Sebeok and Sidney Levy, Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Levine, Donald (1985), The Flight from Ambipuitv. Essays
in Social and Cultural Theorv. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Levitt, Theodore (1983), "The Globalization of Markets,"
Harvard Business Review, 61(3): 92-102.
A final mythic view of the Odyssey equates tbe project
with a pilgrimage. The process of the pilgrimage is
described succinctly by Turner (1978) ; the goal of the
pilgrimage is specified by Tucker (1967). According to
Turner (1978), pilgrimage is characterized by such factors as release from mundane structures, homogenization
of status, communitas, ordeal, reflection on the meaning
of basic religious and cultural values, emergence of the
integral person from multiple personae, movement versus
stasis, and individuality posed against institutionalized
milieu. Given the metaphoric correspondences established
earlier, the Odyssey clearly qualified as a pilgrimage.
McCloskey, Donald (1985), The Rhetoric
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
of
Economics.
Mitroff, Ian and Ralph Kilmann (1978), Methodological
Approaches to Social Science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, Goreth (1980), "Paradigms, Metaphors and Puzzle
Solving in Organization Theoty," Administrative Science
Quarterlv. 25(December): 605-622.
372
Shweder, Richard (1986), "Storytelling Among the Anthropologists," New York Times Book Review. September 21, 1!
38-39.
Temple, Kerry (1986), "Jack Kerouac's Two-Lane Highway,'?
Notre Dame Mafrazine. 15(2): 23-28.
Tucker, 'William, ed. (1967), Foundations tor a Theorv oj:
Consumer Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
Turbayne, Colin (1962), The Myth of Metaphor, New Havenj
Yale University Press.
Turner,
Aldine.
Victor
(1969),
The
Ritual
Process,
Chlcagoj
(1974), Dramas. Fields and Metaphors.
Cornell University Press.
Ithaca
(1978), Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Cul
ture, New York: Columbia University Press,
Van Gennep, Arnold (1960), The Rites of Passage. London
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Weiner, Norbert (1964), "Intellectual Honesty and th
Contemporary Scientist," Technoloev Review., (April): 17
18; 45-47.
White, Hayden (1978), Tropics
Johns Hopkins Press.
Whyte, William
- Where Do We
America, eds.
York: Columbia
of Discourse.
Baltimore
(1978), "Organizational Behavior Research
Go From Here?" in Applied Anthropologv in
Elizabeth Eddy and William Partridge, Ne
University Press, 129-143.
373